

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

TRENTON, NJ -
Following a May 13th citizen's inspection of the highest risk
chemical plant in the U.S., Greenpeace today cited the Kuehne Chemical
Co., Inc. of South Kearney, NJ for "failure to prevent catastrophic
risks." The report was given to the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), the United States Coast Guard and a copy to Kuehne. Greenpeace
has also confirmed that the Kuehne facility is exempt from the temporary
DHS security rules for chemical plants because it is subject to much
less stringent rules under the Maritime Transportation Security Act.
The report includes photos of the plant taken in the middle of the day
from Greenpeace boats on the Hackensack River, from above the plant on
the Pulaski Skyway and in front of the plant's main gate. Greenpeace
inspectors were never approached by plant personnel or other security.
According to the disaster scenario submitted by Kuehne to the EPA, the
company's plant puts 12 million people at risk who live within a 14-mile
radius throughout the NY-NJ metropolitan area. https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/assets/binaries/kuehne-plant
"Our inspection shows that the chemical disaster scenario that Kuehne
has given to the EPA is as unrealistic as the estimates BP first gave
about the size of their Deepwater oil rig blow out," said Rick Hind,
Greenpeace Legislative Director. "Kuehne's scenario is based on a
fraction of the nearly 2 million pounds of chlorine gas they may have on
site. In contrast, the Clorox Company announced plans in November to
convert all of their U.S. facilities to safer processes. Instead of
taking similar action, Kuehne is asking for a $50 million hand-out from
taxpayers. It's time for Congress to pass legislation that requires all
of the highest risk plants to prevent chemical disasters."
Under a temporary federal law the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
is actually prohibited from requiring the use of safer chemical
processes to prevent chemical disasters. Furthermore in March, the DHS
testified that it would inspect only 4 percent of the 5,000 "high-risk"
plants by the end of 2010. The DHS and EPA are asking Congress for
authority to prevent these risks.
Congress is currently considering permanent legislation that will
prevent chemical disasters whether by terrorist attacks or accidents.
Approximately 500 plants have already begun using safer alternatives to
eliminate these risks to 40 million Americans. The U.S. Senate is about
to consider legislation (H.R. 2868) passed by the House in November.
Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) is preparing to introduce this
legislation in the Senate before the July 4th recess.
"New Jersey has led the nation in requiring high-risk chemical plants to
'assess" safer alternatives but the catastrophic risks posed by Kuehne
Chemical and others are living proof of the need for new federal
standards that require the use of safer chemical processes, " said Rick
Engler, Director of the New Jersey Work Environment Council. "The day
after another attack like 9/11, no one will question whether we should
have required these plants to use safer available alternatives."
Today 300 U.S. chemical plants together put 110 million Americans at
risk of a catastrophic attack or accident up to 25 miles down wind of
their facilities. In 2004, the Homeland Security Council estimated that
an attack on a chemical facility would kill 17,500 people, seriously
injure 10,000, and send and additional 100,000 people to the hospital.
The magnitude of a chemical facility's risk is based on the "worst case
scenario" reports they submit to the EPA. The DHS has warned chemical
facilities that the worst-case scenarios of a terrorist attack will be
"more severe" than those submitted to the EPA. A terrorist attack could
result in the release of much more than one storage tank of poison
gases stored on site. The accidental release of one tank of poison gas
at the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India in 1984 killed 8,000 people
within a few days.
America's railroads are the largest carriers of poison gases. These
gases represent only 0.3 percent of all of their cargo but 80 percent of
their liability. In 2008 the Association of American Railroads said,
"It's time for the big chemical companies to do their part to help
protect America. They should stop manufacturing dangerous chemicals when
safer substitutes are available. And if they won't do it, Congress
should do it for them..."
This is the third in a series of Greenpeace citizen inspections of
high-risk chemical facilities. The first inspections were announced on
May 21st at two DuPont facilities in Delaware and New Jersey. https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/failed-inspection
Kuehne Chemical was part of a front page NY Daily News expose' in July
2002 about the highest risk chemical plants in the NY metro area and was
also featured in a November 2003 CBS 60 Minutes story about chemical
plant security.
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000"That is a confrontation of Cold War proportions," warned one observer.
Update:
US forces have now boarded and seized control of the Russian-flagged oil vessel in the North Atlantic, the Associated Press reported Wednesday.
Earlier:
United States military forces on Wednesday attempted to board and seize control of a Venezuela-linked and Russian-flagged oil tanker after a weekslong pursuit across the Atlantic, sparking fears of a broader conflict stemming from US President Donald Trump's assault on the South American country.
Reuters reported that the US Coast Guard and military are leading the takeover operation, which came "after the tanker, originally known as the Bella-1, slipped through a US maritime 'blockade' of sanctioned tankers and rebuffed US Coast Guard efforts to board it." According to the Wall Street Journal, "Helicopters and at least one Coast Guard vessel were being used to take control of the tanker."
The vessel is reportedly being escorted by a Russian submarine, fueling concerns of a direct confrontation between two nuclear powers.
Video footage published Tuesday by RT purports to show US forces pursuing the tanker, whose name was recently changed to the Marinera.
BREAKING WORLD EXCLUSIVE: RT obtains FIRST footage of Russian-flagged civilian Marinera tanker being CHASED by US Coast Guard warship in the North Atlantic https://t.co/sNbqJkm5O5 pic.twitter.com/XtbBML3a6j
— RT (@RT_com) January 6, 2026
The New York Times reported that US forces first stopped the tanker in the Caribbean on December 21.
According to the Times:
The ship, which started its journey in Iran, had been on its way to pick up oil in Venezuela.
At the time, the United States said it had a seizure warrant on the vessel because it was not flying a valid national flag. But the Bella 1 refused to be boarded and sailed into the Atlantic, with the United States in pursuit.
Then came a series of moves to ward off the United States. The fleeing crew painted a Russian flag on the hull, the tanker was renamed and added to an official Russian ship database, and Russia made a formal diplomatic request that the United States stop its chase.
Observers voiced alarm over the tense and fast-moving situation.
"Don’t wish to be hyperbolic, but if—if—US special forces are intercepting and seeking to board a now Russian-flagged tanker, apparently with submarine escort, then that is a confrontation of Cold War proportions," warned British journalist Jon Sopel.
US President Donald Trump declared that Venezuela will hand over up to 50 million barrels of oil—which could be sold for around $3 billion.
US President Donald Trump claimed late Tuesday that Venezuela's interim leadership will turn over to the United States as many as 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to be sold at market price, part of a broader, unlawful administration effort to seize the South American nation's natural resources.
Trump, who authorized the illegal US bombing of Venezuela and abduction of its president this past weekend, said he would control the proceeds of the sale—which could amount to $3 billion.
"Just straight-up piracy and extortion from the US president," journalist Mehdi Hasan wrote in response.
Consistent with his administration's conduct since the weekend attack that killed at least 75 people in Venezuela, Trump provided few details on how his scheme would work or how it would comply with domestic and international law, both of which the president has repeatedly disregarded and treated with contempt.
It's also not clear that Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela's acting president and an ally of Nicolás Maduro, has agreed to Trump's plan, which he announced on social media as his administration worked to entice US oil giants to take part in its effort to exploit the South American nation's vast reserves.
Ahead of the US attack on Venezuela, the Trump administration imposed a blockade on sanctioned oil tankers approaching or leaving Venezuela, pushing the country closer to economic collapse. The New York Times noted Tuesday that Trump's decision to "begin targeting tankers carrying Venezuelan crude to Asian markets had paralyzed the state oil company’s exports."
"To keep the wells pumping, the state oil company, known as PDVSA, had been redirecting crude oil into storage tanks and turning tankers idling in ports into floating storage facilities," the Times reported. During Trump's first White House term, he banned US companies from working with PDVSA.
Trump wrote in his social media post Tuesday that the tens of millions of barrels of oil "will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States."
"I have asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute this plan, immediately," Trump wrote.
The Trump administration is also pushing Venezuela's interim leadership to meet a series of US demands before it can pump more oil, ABC News reported late Tuesday. Trump has illegally threatened to launch another attack on Venezuela, and target more of its politicians, if the country's leadership doesn't follow his administration's orders.
According to ABC, the Trump administration has instructed Venezuela to "kick out China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba and sever economic ties."
"Second, Venezuela must agree to partner exclusively with the US on oil production and favor America when selling heavy crude oil," ABC added, citing unnamed sources. "According to one person, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers in a private briefing on Monday that he believes the US can force Venezuela's hand because its existing oil tankers are full. Rubio also told lawmakers that the US estimates that Caracas has only a couple of weeks before it will become financially insolvent without the sale of its oil reserves."
"Congress will not bankroll illegal, unnecessary military action in Greenland just to soothe the ego of a power-hungry wannabe dictator."
As leaders in Europe respond to once-unimaginable threats by the United States to take territory from a NATO ally, one US senator on Monday proposed legislation banning funding for any Trump administration military action against Greenland.
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) put forth an amendment to the Senate Defense Appropriations bill "to prohibit the use of funds for military force, the conduct of hostilities, or the preparation for war against or with respect to Greenland," a self-governing territory of Denmark.
“Families are getting crushed by rising grocery and housing costs, inflation is up, and [President Donald] Trump’s name is all over the Epstein files," Gallego said in a statement. "Instead of doing anything to fix those problems, Trump is trying to distract people by threatening to start wars and invade countries—first in Venezuela, and now against our NATO ally Denmark."
“What’s happening in Venezuela shows us that we can’t just ignore Trump’s reckless threats," Gallego added. "His dangerous behavior puts American lives and our global credibility at risk. I’m introducing this amendment to make it clear that Congress will not bankroll illegal, unnecessary military action, and to force Republicans to choose whether they’re going to finally stand up or keep enabling Trump’s chaos.”
"This is not more complicated than the fact that Trump wants a giant island with his name on it. He wouldn’t think twice about putting our troops in danger if it makes him feel big and strong. The US military is not a toy," Gallego—a former Marine Corps infantryman—said on social media.
The illegal US invasion and bombing of Venezuela and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife—which came amid a high-seas airstrike campaign against alleged drug traffickers—spooked many Greenlanders, Danes, and Europeans, who say they have no choice but to take Trump's threats seriously.
“Threats, pressure, and talk of annexation have no place between friends,” Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said Monday on social media. “That is not how you speak to a people who have shown responsibility, stability, and loyalty time and again. Enough is enough. No more pressure. No more innuendo. No more fantasies about annexation.”
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned during a Monday television interview that "if the United States decides to militarily attack another NATO country, then everything would stop—that includes NATO, and therefore the post-Second World War security."
Other European leaders have also rallied behind Greenland amid the mounting US threat.
"Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland," the leaders of Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain asserted in a statement also backed by the Netherlands and Canada—which Trump has said he wants to make the "51st state."
The White House said Tuesday that Trump and members of his national security team are weighing a “range of options” to acquire Greenland, and that military action is “always an option” for seizing the mineral-rich and strategic island.
This, after White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller brushed off criticism of a social media post by his wife, who posted an image showing a map of Greenland covered in the American flag with the caption, "SOON."
"You can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else," Miller told CNN on Monday. "But we live in a world, in the real world, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power."
No war powers resolution has ever succeeded in stopping a US president from proceeding with military action, including one introduced last month by Gallego in a bid to stop the boat strikes in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who has also unsuccessfully tried to get war powers resolutions passed, implied Tuesday that more measures aimed at preventing Trump from attacking Greenland may be forthcoming.
“He has repeatedly raised Greenland, Cuba, Mexico, Colombia. He’s waged military action within Nigeria,” Kaine said of Trump, who has bombed more countries than any president in history. “So I think members of the Senate should go on the record about all of it.”
In Greenland, only a handful of the island's 57,000 inhabitants want to join the United States. More than 8 in 10 favor independence amid often strained relations with their masters in Copenhagen and the legacy of a colonial history rife with abuses. Greenlanders enjoy a Nordic-style social welfare system that features universal healthcare; free higher education; and income, family, and employment benefits and protections unimaginable in today's United States.
Pro-independence figures say like-minded people must use the specter of a US takeover to wring concessions from Denmark.
"I am more nervous that we are potentially in a situation where only Denmark's wishes are taken into account and that we have not even been clarified about what we want," Aki-Matilda Tilia Ditte Høegh-Dam, a member of the pro-independence Naleraq party in Greenland's Inatsisartut, or Parliament, told Sermitsiaq on Tuesday.
"I'm in the Folketinget [Danish Parliament] right now, and I see that the Danish government is constantly making agreements with the United States," she added. "It’s not that they ask Greenland first."
US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) was among observers who noted Tuesday that any US invasion of Greenland would oblige other NATO members to defend the island under the North Atlantic Treaty's collective defense requirement.
“That’s what Article 5 says. Article 5 did not anticipate that the invading country would be a member of NATO,” Murphy told reporters on Capitol Hill. “We’re laughing, but this is not actually something to laugh about now because I think he’s increasingly serious.”